Flip-Flops, Principles and Politics

October 9, 2002

The Washington Post's E. J. Dionne comments on the current Social Security reform debate in "Election Season Flip-Flops." He applauds the Club for Growth's Stephen Moore and Thomas Rhodes for their memo to NRCC Chairman Rep. Thomas Davis warning that Republicans "risked being perceived as unprincipled flip-floppers on the social security issue." The flip-flop concerns candidates' decision to drop the word "privatization."

Dionne agrees that Republicans should stand firm on their support of individual accounts, so that "privatization be debated honestly." Dionne goes as far as to wonder if "advocates of privatization are scared by the political impact of their own positions." And even if they're not scared, Dionne wonders if Republicans would interpret a November Democrat "defeat as a reason to revisit Social Security privatization." While Dionne opposes personal accounts, he writes that, "Personally, I prefer Moore and Rhodes. They are willing to make their case without evasion and to say the same thing both before Election Day and after."

Lamentably, far from the realm of principle lies the realm of politics. "Last month Steve Schmidt, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, acknowledged to The Post's Jonathan Weisman that his party's current flight from privatization is dictated by electoral politics. In order for there to be an honest debate on Social Security, Democrats have to lose this election."

2005 Index | 2004 Index
2003 Index | 2002 Index | 2001 Index
2000 Index | 1999 Index | 1998 Index